hausdok

Hey! No talking about peckers and Ms. Romano da voigin and smearing 'er wit olive oil or wuddever you said. Dis is a classy joint; no doity minds here! Da noive a dis guy! OT - OF!!! M.

Bill, That is so friggin' kewl! What a work of art! ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

What was that sound? Dang, I could have sworn I heard Nick belch. OT - OF!!! M.

Nope, they aren't damp when they're properly ventilated and a cap sheet's been properly installed over the soil. In fact, I usually don't even find elevated moisture in the floor deck or platform framing unless one or both of those issues has been screwed up. With a proper cap sheet on the soil, you'll get more vapor diffusion moving through the floors into the area above the insulation than you will from what escapes the barrier. The paper facing has a black emulsion coating the side of the paper that you can't see; that acts like a vapor barrier. Once warm interior moisture-laden air moves through the floor deck it tries to continue moving toward that cooler/dryer crawl. Then that moisture encounters that asphalt-treated paper barrier and is slowed or stopped - it then cools to dewpoint and condenses in the insulation. Before too long, the floor above starts to grow whiskers or develops leopard spots (Psst,...M word). Facing and insulation snug against the underside of the floor - not flush with the bottom of the joists with an air gap above, good ventilation and a properly applied barrier. If you've got that, the likelihood of serious issues (anywhere except the seriously humid mid-eastern and southeastern states - or anywhere else where it's seriously humid) is almost nil. Go to the Building Science site and download a copy of Dr. Joe's Moisture Control Handbook. Come to think of it, check our links library first; I think we've got a link directly to it in there. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Yeah, you might be right; if I ate that foccacia and whey stuff I might be dead too. Anyone got a pound of lard to spare; I'm all out. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Foccacia? First whey powder and now this; where have we TIJers failed with Kurt? Oh, woe is me! ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hell, Maybe I shouldn't respond to stuff until I've had my 4th cup of coffee in the morning. I'd thought that was the A.I.I. post you'd responded to. Still, odd how close it resembles the stuff that the AII guys say. No matter, it worked anyway. You're right about gibberish getting people in trouble though; just look how quickly Dubya became late night comedy fodder. [] ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Looks like the inner end of a dead man of some sort. Is that side of the foundation built into a bank? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Is that from the SOP, word for word? Because if it is, the writer ran off the rails. Either the writer is calling the HI "it;" or, the writer is saying that a roof could damage the roof. Or both. Where do we get such men? And why do we allow them to make rules and write nonsense? WJ No Walter, That's not direct from their SOP. It's from a comparison document that I did where I kind of dissected all of the SOP's and stacked the applicable portions side-by-side in order to compare them to one another. Still, I guess most of us illiterates are able to figure out what "it" is in this context - when we're not showing off and sucking up to realtors, that is. [:-smile_g Say, I just had a thought; you and Mike Holmes should hook up - then the two of you could really expose the illiterate, illogical and incompetent underbelly of the home inspection world. [] ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hmm, From my point of view, he's just one more contractor that thinks constructon knowledge automatically makes him qualified to inspect homes. I'm just wondering how he expects to go around the country exposing all of those dastardly home inspectors when he won't be licensed to operate in about 34 of the 50 states. It's a shame really; someone with that kind of media clout could really help this profession by inspiring inspectors; maybe even get enough young people interested in the profession that we could finally find a way to get degree-earning home inspection courses underway in colleges around the country. Instead, he spits in everyone's face and basically insults the entire profession. I wonder if six months from now we'll see he and Nicky Boy all cuddled up together. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Did you tell them to flip that batting? OT - OF!!! M.

Follow-up Press Release TORONTO - Feb. 26 The Holmes Group is proud to announce the launch of the MIKE HOLMES INSPECTIONS-a full service home inspection company. The pilot project is set to begin in Kitchener-Waterloo, Guelph and Cambridge area of Southwestern Ontario. Mike Holmes will be at Words Worth Books (100 King St South, Waterloo) at 1:00pm on February 28, 2009. He will sign copies of his books and introduce the first Mike Holmes Approved Inspector. MIKE HOLMES INSPECTIONS is the direct result of the number of personal emails and letters Mike has received from homeowners dissatisfied with the quality of their home inspections. Thousands of homeowners have purchased flawed homes based on incomplete, inaccurate or incompetent inspections-and these purchases have cost them money and heartache. MIKE HOLMES INSPECTIONS will offer Essential and Extended Home inspections on resale homes, Energy Audits and Pre-Delivery Inspections on newly built homes. Mike Holmes Approved Inspectors will "Make it Right" by providing clients with a comprehensive, high quality and reliable inspection of their home, or potential home. They are experienced, trained, reliable and fully independent professionals who are responsible to the client. Inspections include a thorough visual investigation of the home's readily accessible features, major systems and their components such as structure, foundation, roof, interior, exterior, heating and ventilation system, electrical, plumbing and more. In addition, inspectors will use the power of infrared, thermal imaging equipment to enhance the inspection. "MIKE HOLMES INSPECTIONS will provide homeowners with the facts, not just an opinion", says Holmes. "That way homeowners can make an educated decision before they buy their home." Mike Holmes, internationally-known as the homeowner's renovation hero, is host of the award-winning Holmes on Homes, which has run for 7 successful seasons as HGTV Canada's No.1 show. Every week Mike uncovers sloppy and dangerous home renovations done by incompetent or dishonest contractors. Then he tears it down and Makes it Right. His new series, Holmes in New Orleans, will air as a special broadcast on April 7 and April 8 on Global television, and run as a six-part mini-series on HGTV, starting April 9. This brilliant series documents the construction of the first home in the Make it Right Foundation's rebuilding of the Lower Ninth Ward. Mike and his team build a home that is LEED Platinum certified, hurricane and flood resistant-right next to where the levee broke during Hurricane Katrina. Mike is also the author of two successful books-the national bestseller Make it Right--Inside Home Renovation with Canada's Most Trusted Contractor and Holmes Inspection-Everything you Need to Know Before You Buy or Sell Your Home, as well as a weekly national newspaper column. ####

Hi, My first thought was an air gap. If you can see the wall void behind it, is it possible this is where there used to be an air gap an this is some kind of bezel that was left behind? ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

TORONTO — February 26 Celebrity renovator Mike Holmes is launching his own home inspection business. The beefy contractor, known for unearthing renovation horror stories on the defunct HGTV series "Holmes on Homes," will launch Mike Holmes Inspections in the southwestern Ontario communities of Kitchener-Waterloo, Guelph and Cambridge. Holmes says many homeowners have emailed and written him complaining about the quality of their home inspections. He says his company will offer inspections, energy audits and "will provide homeowners with the facts, not just an opinion." To read more in the The Canadian Press, click here.

I think it depends on where that TD ends under the shingles. It should overlap the ridge and then end on top of that second or third course of shingles before the last couple of courses are added on the shingled side. That way, any water pushed under the ridge will just drain out from under those top courses and onto the shingles below. That's a dumb chimney detail though; I hope they flashed that sucker correctly. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike.

Steve, I just realized that you forgot the little association that could - the American Institute of Inspectors (A.I.I.) The Inspector shall: Observe the roof and report on roof coverings; roof drainage systems; flashings; skylights, chimneys and roof penetrations; visible condition of the exterior of chimneys and flues; the appearance of instability or missing attachment or guying system for antennae or TV dish system; and signs of leaks or abnormal water intrusion into/onto building components. Identify the type of roof covering materials. Report the methods used to observe the roofing; the overall condition of the roofing; and any conditions that are damaging to the roof The inspector is not required to: Walk on the roofing when walking could damage the property or be unsafe to the inspector. Report on any antennae or Satellite dish system function, operation or its grounding system or on the interior of flues or chimneys that are not readily accessible and/or visible. Not much different there - more of the same, really - just thought I'd point it out. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Yo Brian, Dawg! Where you been, Bro? Chillin' in da hood, or wut? OT - OF!!! M.

Heck Rich, That's what the seat of your pants is for! OT - OF!!! M.

Bhuwahahahahahah, Who knows what lurks in the minds of those roofers? Who else? The Shadow knows. Bhuwahahahahahahahahahahaha!!!

John, Don't think SOP - think standard of care. Folks comply with SOPs all the time and still get sued and get judgments against them. Until I'd seen it tested in court, multiple times, and it held up, I wouldn't get too comfortable hiding behind an SOP. Just about all of those things specifically state that there's nothing prohibiting an inspector from exceeding those standards; and, if most are exceeding the standards, the standard of care might just be the one that judges look at because it does more to protect the consumer than the SOP does. Could be wrong - have been many times - as Walter will tell you. I generally spout off about all sorts of stuff I have no inkling about. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Hi Tom, I completely agree; if you can tell from the ground that a roof is completely shot there's not much point in going up onto it because everything about it, flashings, gutters, everything is going to change as soon as the new roof is installed. In a case like that, I don't go up onto them either. The roofs that I believe most folks are referring to are those that look fine from the ground, and even when you look at them through binoculars, but then turn out to have lots of stuff wrong that you couldn't see from the ground or with binos. Hell, I've had some where I coudn't actually see the issues until I'd climbed off the ladder, walked up the roof a couple of yards and was staring straight down at whatever it was. Again, one has to listen to that inner voice; just be aware that if it was simple to look at and couldn't be seen with binos or from the ground or a ladder, and you blew it off 'cuz you don't do roofs or are simply afraid of heights, you could find yourself in a situation where you're facing scrutiny 'cuz someone had accused you of negligence. It doesn't mean they'd win, but you could find yourself in that situation, no? Seriously though, folks who're afraid of heights shouldn't get into jobs where they're expected to go high, folks who're afraid of close places shouldn't get into jobs where they'll be in small enclosed places, folks who're spooked by certain stuff shouldn't be getting into work where they'll encounter that stuff unless they are willing to conquer those fears and drive on and do the work the way they're expected to do it. You've heard me talk about how I don't like rats - that's not a joke or a funny story - I seriously am more afraid of a rat than death, but have to go into nasty, dirty, dark, close rat-infested spaces all the time in order to do the job the way I'm expected to do it. That's just the way it is. ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

Now Walter, don't hate, I walk 'em all unless the pitch is just to steep for me to get up onto the cover from the eaves or at the valleys. The number of times that roofs looked great from the ground and turned out to have significant issues once I got up onto them is probably better than 50%. That's enough to convince me I need to do it, but that's only me. Walking roofs is a personal decision. Nobody can make it for you and if you gut tells you not to make the climb - don't. That said, I was about 10 when my father first got myself and my younger brother up onto a roof to learn how to shingle. He was adding a 1-1/2 story garage addition onto the house. The roof was about a 6:12 slope. The first thing he did was make us wear soft-soled shoes and warned us never to wear shoes with hard leather soles (That was easy for us; we were just kids and wore sneakers anyway.) and then he taught us how to place our feet on the roof so there'd always be maximum sole surface area gripping the cover when we were traversing and he taught us where to position our center of gravity. We spent the rest of that weekend helping him shingle that roof. That was in the days before OSHA. We didn't wear safety harnesses and there weren't any fancy roof jacks, roof ladders or scaffolding - just a couple of cleats nailed to the deck to brace our feet on as we knelt on the surface. The next summer, he put me to work on his construction company building farm silos. I don't have a fear of heights but I do respect heights. When I was 14, I slipped off of the solo scaffolding on Thanksgiving weekend, fell about 10 feet, landed on the corner of a piece of sheet metal and punched a hole the size of my fist in my back. 21 stainless steel sutures. Dad got me out there working the next weekend. I didn't fall again for 34 years; then one hot day in 2000 I went off a roof. I think the reason that I fell is that I feinted from the heat but I really don't know because I have no recollection of the incident. While I was on the roof, the realtor and my client were measuring for carpeting inside the house. After a while, a kid walking down the sidewalk saw me lying in the yard, went up to the door, knocked, and then told them about the "bum" sleeping in the yard. By the time they found me, purple foam was coming out of my mouth; five broken ribs, a punctured lung and a pretty good gash in my head that caused a concussion and the memory loss. I spent 11 days in the hospital, was flat on my back for nearly 2 months and then spent another two getting strong enough and steady enough to work again. I still go up on roofs; however, now my wife Yung, known affectionately as the Korean Konnection, accompanies me on every inspection she can and watches me like a hawk whenever I go up on the roof. It worked out great - she's a phenomenal interior inspector. There is this tendency in this profession to come up with all sorts of reasons why one doesn't have to do something; don't go on roofs - it's dangerous (Duh, ya think?), don't go into an attic and walk on the lower chords of trusses because you can damage the house (Possible in only the remotest of circumstances, but if you know what you're doing - and you should you're an inspector and supposed to be the expert - it's a pretty poor excuse), don't go into crawlspaces because there might be snakes or spiders that will bite you (Due, ya think?). I've never seen a roofing employee or satellite installer go, "Hey boss, I can't work up there, it's dangerous," or an alarm systems installer refuse to go into an attic or crawlspace because he (or she) is afraid of damaging trusses or getting nibbled on by a spider. There are certain expectations that come with every profession - walking on roofs whenever it is possible is one that comes with this one. The simple fact that people who are paid a whole lot less than we are go into these places every day of the week and do their jobs just fine without falling, without going through ceilings or otherwise damaging a house, and without getting bitten in crawlspaces is reason enough why home inspectors shouldn't be hiding behind namby-pamby reasons for not doing their jobs to the best of their abilities. These are simply excuses an inspector uses to be a little bit, pardon me if I offend anyone here.......lazy, or to get the job done quicker so they can move onto the next house and rush through it without getting dirty or tearing the knee out of their trousers, etc. My opinion, stated as fact without proof - I admit it. Have I refused to walk on roofs because I felt they were to dangerous to do so without specialized equipment? Yes, I but still do roofs that a lot of guys in the biz won't - only because I'm comfortable with heights and I have a different experience level than some. The objective is to do the best job for the client that one is capable of, no? We all have a little voice inside us that tells us when we need to stop - I tend to listen to that voice 'cuz it's saved me from doing some very dumb things over the years. If the voice says, "Nah, ain't worth it," I listen. However, I'll never hear that voice when it comes to doing a flat roof or anything less than a 12:12 pitch, under dry conditions. I wouldn't expect every inspector to be able to do that, but I think that if inspectors aren't getting on flat roofs, or roofs that are up to at least 6:12 they should get out of the business because they are not giving the client the service that that the client expects. For the record, I wanted one of our rules here to be that we inform the client at the very first contact, whether email or telephone, about the stuff that we won't be doing when we arrive on the site. I felt that it's important that, if a buyer expects the inspector to go up onto and traverse roofs, go into attics and go through them as far as they can, and go into crawlspaces when they can safely do so, that the client should have that opportunity to decide to go with another inspector; not when they show up the day of the inspection and discover the inspector doesn't do it and they've only got a day or so left in the inspection window. I felt that just wasn't fair to the consumer. The board didn't want that rule; guess some felt that there was too much of a chance they'd lose business if they told folks up front which one of the client's expectations they weren't going to fill that most other inspectors will. Walter, you do a lot of standard of care work. Wouldn't it be the case that when at least 95% of a profession establishes something as the standard of care in a region, even when that something is dangerous, like going up onto roofs, that, if there's an accusation of negligence, the person who bucks that trend had better be able to convince his/her peers that there was a really, really good reason why that "professional" didn't perform to that standard of care? We did a poll here on TIJ a while back and asked folks whether they ever got up on roofs to inspect them - 95% said that they do get up onto roofs. Not all inspectors are going up onto the majority of roofs to inspect them; 5% said that they only inspect, by going up onto them, roofs on about 20 to 30% of the houses they've inspected; 15% said that they've inspected, by going up onto them, roofs on 40 to 50% of the houses they've inspected; 25% of them said that they inspect, by going up onto them, roofs of 60 to 70% of the houses they've inspected, 18% said that they inspect, by going up onto them, roofs of 80 to 90% of the houses they've inspected, and the largest percentile - 33% - said that they've inspected, by going up onto them, the roofs of more than 90% of the roofs of houses they inspect. You and I don't disagree that often but this is one subject that I think we've always disagreed about - that's okay, I don't hate. you still da Man. For a different perspective from a fellow that used to be strongly opposed to roofs, and the reasons why he's changed his mind, click here. For anyone that's interested, that poll is here.

By Steven Smith, King of the House Inc., Bellingham, WA Is a home inspector incompetent if he or she does not, as a general rule, traverse roofs? At one time it would have been safe to say "no, failure to go on the roof does not make an inspector incompetent". However, as client expectations change, and many in the industry strive to improve the credibility of home inspectors, I think that the answer to that question is now bobbing in the surf. As the public and the industry demand better home inspections, that is good for the consumer. Let's look at some of the changes that are emerging. The old standards, used seemingly forever by the better-known home inspector organizations, were written to make it easy for an inspector to opt out of walking on a roof -- even low-sloped and flat roofs. NAHI says: "The inspector will, if possible, inspect the roof surface and components from arms-length or with binoculars from the ground." NACHI says: "The inspector is not required to walk on any pitched roof surface." ASHI says: "The inspector is not required to walk on the roofing." So, under those rules, if so inclined, an inspector can pull-up on-site, knowing full well that he or she will not try to walk the roof. Heck, there are no violations of standards, no explanations required, just tell the clients you do not do roofs. Do these people realize they are home inspectors? If an inspector cannot traverse even a simple single-story roof that is flat, or 3/12 slope with three-tab shingles, should that person with that attitude be a home inspector at all? Sure, some people are afraid of roofs and heights, but we hope that does not include those who are working as home inspectors. Here is why I think changes are in the wind. First, I saw an article online from CREIA. CREIA (California Real Estate Inspection Association) flat-out states that any inspector who does not normally walk the roof may not be doing a "competent" job. There is no state inspector licensing in California but CREIA, a non-profit, voluntary association, provides education, training, and support services to the real estate inspection industry and to the public. They state that their Standards of Practice have been recognized by the State of California, and are considered to be the source for Home Inspector Standard of Care by the real estate and legal communities. Okay, so they have been around more than 30 years and they have credibility. So let us look at what they tell Californians, consumers, who are looking at hiring a home inspector: "A detailed roof evaluation is a standard part of every competent home inspection. Home inspectors typically inspect a roof by walking on the surface, as this is the best way to observe and evaluate all pertinent conditions. There are some conditions that could keep an inspector off the roof (barring these circumstances, a competent inspector should include a walk on the roof). The conditions they list include: The surface is too high for access with a normal length ladder; The roofing is so deteriorated that foot traffic would cause further damage; Surface conditions such as snow, ice, moisture, or moss make the roof too slippery; The roofing consists of tiles that might break under foot pressure; The sellers have told the inspector to stay off the roof The intent is clear -- the inspector should arrive on-site prepared to walk the roof. Any decision, not to go on the roof, should be based on conditions found at the site, not pre-conceived policies that exclude walking the surface of the roof. Put simply, if one is not walking the roof, that should be the exception and not the rule. I always arrive prepared to traverse the roof, sometimes circumstances are such that I cannot. This policy, expecting more from home inspectors, does not stop in California. The Washington State Home Inspector Licensing Advisory Board has put even stronger language in the Standards of Practice for this state. These standards become law in September. Roofs. The inspector will: Traverse the roof to inspect it. There it is. Again, the intent is clear. The licensed home inspector, by law, must be willing to traverse roofs. There are times when an inspector cannot and should not go on the roof. The board is aware of that and there are "outs" in the law, as there must be. But, if as a general practice, an inspector does not walk roofs, he or she is violating the law as written. There were some members on the board who wanted even stronger language in this regard. It would have mandated full disclosure to clients, when the inspection was booked, that the inspector does not go on roofs. The bottom line: No inspector can walk every roof and some roofs are plain unsafe or could be damaged. But inspectors who have a policy of not going on roofs at all, or do not have an open-mind about it, are leaving out an important part of the home inspection. Fact is, it can be hard to detect roof and flashing problems even when you are up on the roof, let alone when you are on the ground or trying to stand on an incline to get a look. You have a better chance of inspecting fine details, appurtenances and flashings if you are actually up on the roof. My view is that, to intentionally and as standard practice, to avoid roofs is a marginal effort on the part of the inspector -- to say the least. The inspector, later, writing into the report some generic mumbo-jumbo language -- called covering your rear -- suggesting that a roofer ought to get up there and check the roof at a later date is a poor substitute for, in the words of CREIA, a competent home inspection in the first place.

Hoo Boy! Walter, there's no doubt about it; you do have the most fitting avatar on the board. [:-smile_g ONE TEAM - ONE FIGHT!!! Mike

New Mexico Business Weekly - February 25, 2009 William Richardson, owner of home inspection company Responsive Inspections Inc., was elected president of the The American Society of Home Inspectors (ASHI), the oldest nonprofit organization for professional home inspectors in North America. The election came at the group’s annual conference in Lake Buena Vista, Fla. Richardson joined ASHI in 1990 and has served as president of the New Mexico ASHI chapter and as the national treasurer and vice president. To read more, click here.